By: Dr. Andreas Østhagen, senior research fellow at the Fridtjof Nansen Institute, Oslo, and the Wilson Center, Washington DC.

A decade ago, as climate change was altering the geography of the region, the resource potential of the North grabbed attention, and states saw the chance to turn a profit. Today, this focus has shifted to concerns about the increased tension between NATO countries and Russia, with a dash of Chinese interests on top.

This brief article unpacks Arctic geopolitics by exploring the different, at times contradictory, political dynamics at play in the North. It explores three levels of relations: the regional (Arctic) level, the international system, and the level of bilateral relations. Labelling these levels as “good,” “bad” and “ugly” – borrowing from Sergio Leone’s 1966 western film – helps shed light on the distinctiveness of Arctic geopolitics.

The Good: Regional Relations and Cooperation

Starting with the good in the Arctic, the regional relations among Arctic states: Canada, Denmark (via Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States. The Arctic region was thrown onto the international agenda in the early 2000s due to the increasingly apparent effects of climate change. Arctic ice sheets were disappearing at an accelerated pace, which coincided with new prospects for offshore oil and gas exploration, as well as the opening of shipping lanes through sensitive areas such as the Northwest Passage.

In response, the Arctic states publicly declared the Arctic to be a “region of cooperation.” They also affirmed their intention to work within established international arrangements and agreements, in particular, the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), an international agreement binding states in shared pursuit of order, cooperation and stability at sea.5F

Since then, the Arctic states have repeated the mantra of cooperation. The deterioration in relations between Russia and its Arctic neighbours since 2014 – a result of Russian actions in eastern Ukraine and Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula – did not change this.

The emergence of the Arctic Council as the primary forum for regional affairs in the Arctic plays into this setting. The Council, founded in Ottawa in 1996, serves as a platform from which its member states can portray themselves as working harmoniously toward common goals. Adding to its legitimacy, an increasing number of actors have applied for and gained observer status on the council: Italy, for example, joined in 2013, alongside China, India, Japan, Korea and Singapore.

The Bad: Global Power Politics

What happens in the Arctic, however, is not the same as international global politics concerned with the Arctic. During the Cold War, the Arctic held a prominent place in the political and military standoffs between the two superpowers. It was important not because of interactions in the Arctic itself (although cat-and-mouse submarine games took place there), but because of its wider strategic role in the systemic competition between the United States and the USSR. The Arctic formed the buffer zone between these two superpower rivals, its airspace comprising the shortest distance for long-range bombers to reach one another’s shores.

Following the easing of Cold War tensions, from the mid-2000s onwards, the Arctic regained strategic geopolitical importance. A repeat of Cold War dynamics has seen Russia, under President Vladimir Putin, strengthen its military (and nuclear) prowess in order to reassert Russia’s position at the top table of world politics. Given the country’s geography and recent history, one of its obvious focus areas would be its Arctic lands and seas.

This is where Russia’s strategic submarines are based, which are essential to the country’s status as a major global nuclear power. Melting of the sea ice and increased resource extraction on the coast along the Northern Sea Route are only some elements that have spurred Russia’s military emphasis in its Arctic development efforts: Russia’s north matters for the Kremlin’s more general strategic plans and ambitions in world politics.

Within these shifting geo-economic and geo-strategic dynamics, China has also emerged as a new Arctic actor, proclaiming itself as a “near-Arctic state.” With Beijing’s continuous efforts to assert influence, the Arctic has emerged as the latest arena where China’s presence and interaction are components of an expansion of power – be it through scientific research or investments in fossil fuel industries. This has led to the Arctic becoming relevant in a global power competition between China and the United States.

The Ugly: The Complexity of International Affairs

There is, however, one further political dynamic that requires examination: actual day-to-day interactions between Arctic states. This is where things get ugly, both because some relations are more fraught than others, and because it is difficult to draw generalizing conclusions across the region.

Central here is the role the Arctic plays in considerations of national defence. This varies greatly amid the Arctic states, because each country prioritizes and deals with its northern areas differently. For Russia, with its vast Eurasian empire, the Arctic is integral to broader national defence considerations. For the Nordic countries, the Arctic is fundamental to national defence policy, precisely because this is where Russia invests considerably in its military capacity.

The Arctic arguably does not play the same pivotal role in national security considerations in North America as in northern Europe.21F Alaska and northern Canada are primarily locations for missile defence capabilities, surveillance infrastructure and a limited number of strategic forces. 22F Commentators have even argued that the most immediate concerns facing the Canadian Arctic today are not defence capabilities, but rather social and health conditions in northern communities, and their poor rates of economic development.

However, bilateral dynamics like in the case of Norway and Russia are multifaceted. Those two states also engage in various types of cooperation, ranging from co-management of fish stocks to search-and-rescue operations and a border crossing regime.26F These cooperative arrangements and agreements have not been revoked following the events of 2014.

Cooperation and Conflict

The Arctic is on the global geopolitical agenda. However, things are not as straightforward as conflict or cooperation in the North. There are some paradoxical that are best understood through the threefold distinction presented here: international competition (why the United States is increasingly focusing on China in an Arctic context), regional interaction (why Arctic states still meet to sign new agreements hailing the cooperative spirit of the North) and bilateral relations (why some Arctic states, and not others, invest heavily in their Northern defence posture).

What these nuances imply is that simplistic descriptions of Arctic geopolitics or a new Cold War in the Arctic today must be taken with a grain of salt. Political dynamics in the North are far too complex for these reductive descriptions. Recognizing this complexity should therefore encourage further studies of security politics in a region that has become an international focal point of examination and discussion.

L'articolo Three levels of Arctic Geopolitics proviene da InsideOver.

The Arctic Silk road project is said to be mainly another way for China to secure trade channels. Yet it is worth asking how this project could also increase China’s diplomatic power. Any route becomes more valuable the more destinations it connects, and the more costs it allows users to save.

What Is The Arctic Silk Road?

The Arctic Silk road, or the Northeast passage—in case of further melting of ice—would connect five countries (including China and Russia) in a maritime trade route from Asia to Europe. Considering the growing manufacturing power of Southeast Asian countries, trade increase between EU and China, and the rising concentration of manufacturing in Asia, the Northeast passage could become one of the world’s most important trade lanes.

Even with China’s Belt and Road initiative, the southern land route from China to its closest European neighbor would take over 5,000 kilometers to pass from Western China to Bulgaria. The northern railway connecting China to Eastern Europe is over 3500 kilometers long. If the Arctic Silk road opened, the distance would be longer by two to or three times, respectively. However, because of lower maritime shipping costs compared to rail and truck shipping, the longer distance wouldn’t be a cost disadvantage.

The Vital Future Importance Of The Arctic Silk Road

Because of the countries the Northeast passage could potentially connect—and the savings it would bring—this road should become very important in the future. Use and ownership of other polar routes has long been a goal for countries bordering them. The two other most anticipated routes are the Northwest Passage and the Transpolar sea route. The Arctic Silk road would connect East Asia and Northern Europe. Contrarily, the Northwest Passage and the Transpolar route would ensure shorter connections between East Asia and North America, and also Europe.

In the article Northwest passage: the future of shipping has arrived, the Northwest passage is found to be a route that could reduce shipping costs from East Asia to the Eastern Coast of US, and deliver benefits like increasing economic activity in the countries managing the passage. The Northwest passage is indeed a promising route.

The Transpolar Sea Route

The Transpolar sea route is the polar route that could be used at the most distant point in the future, compared to the Northwest and Northeast passages. The Transpolar sea route—although the hardest pass through—would offer the “most direct route for trans-Arctic shipping”, according to the Arctic Institute. The Transpolar route would also offer the most benefits, but its state makes them very hard to reach.

Marine Shipping Has A Bright Future

Cheaper sea shipping due to reductions in distance seem to be the future. This is even more the case when jet fuel costs remain high, and alternatives such as biofuels are priced even higher. Reductions in fuel costs could make air transportation a far more accessible mode for shipping. However, the outlook remains favorable to marine shipping.

The opening up of polar routes could present not only economic, but also diplomatic benefits to countries using and governing them.

China’s Five Principles

The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and the development of the domestic economy are the base of China’s diplomacy. The base of Chinese diplomacy is comprised not only of guiding principles, but also goals to achieve. In the 21^st century, China’s diplomacy has concentrated on using trade and infrastructure to pursue the development of its domestic economy. However, the interest in the Northeast passage reveals a far different strategy.

Maritime shipping from China to Europe through the Northeast passage—instead of the current route through the Suez Canal—would cross a shorter distance by just over 1,000 kilometers. Investment into this route would offer only marginal distance savings. The investment would be large, as this route is rarely navigated even by icebreakers. These facts show that cost reduction benefits can’t be the main reason for the attention being put into the Arctic Silk Road project.

Looking at countries competing with China for global power should reveal its goals, and needs for achieving them. From an economic perspective, older manufacturing giants such as Germany and Japan have been undoubtedly concerned with the transfer of manufacturing and know-how into a lower cost country.

To reason with these countries diplomatically, China needs leverage to influence trade negotiations, and to sway third parties. When foreign investments and aid aren’t a viable course of action, new ties in an international organization (the Arctic Council), and common concerns (trade between Asia and Europe), are a better way of influencing decisions and having leverage.

Diplomatic Benefits To China From An Arctic Silk Road

Compared to other polar routes, the Arctic Silk Road could become the most valuable of all. Trade between Asian and EU countries has remained stable in the past decade. With increasing infrastructure connectivity, increases in trade are bound to happen in the future. Hence, participating in the development of the Northeast passage gives not only direct diplomatic benefits to China, but moreover the new infrastructure connection should increase trade even more. Along with it, closer ties between countries participating in it can be expected.

From a military diplomacy perspective, China’s strengthening military (both in budget and in activity increases), is a growing issue with its neighbors. For some, it’s just a cause for concern. For others—such as the Philippines—China’s military activities are a cause for action.

Participation in negotiations for the future of the Arctic Silk road, and influencing them, would give China benefits in the area of military operations. Joint projects, participation in the same projects, funding of common initiatives, and actions beneficial to several sides help to improve military diplomacy. China’s observer status in the Arctic Council not only affords the opportunity to perform these activities, but also to build goodwill through a neutral forum.

China’s Need For Natural Resources

Looking into the future, certain issues could push China to use the leverage Arctic Silk road will give. The growing need for natural resources outside of China’s territory could be a problem that will require diplomatic leverage to solve. China’s demand for natural resources both for export and for the needs of its population is projected to grow year-by-year. Saturation could decrease the pace of growth, but demand will still remain steady.

China imports large quantities of natural resources from foreign countries. Any difficulties with imports would clash with the demand from China’s. Beijing’s increasing operations in an important trade route would put the country in a stronger negotiating position for access to natural resources. When a steady access to resources is imperative for growth, using power gained by participating in the management of important trade routes is not unusual.

There are still areas in China’s diplomacy where changes could expand China’s power. Being a true superpower requires not only a strong economic position, but also strong cultural exports and ties with intercontinental allies. Initiatives and exports mainly pushed by governments aren’t always influential, and diplomacy mainly based on trade will always be viewed through the lenses of benefits and disadvantages.

With growing economic and trade power, and being the second-largest largest economy in the world, it would seem that diplomacy and diplomatic power should not be an important concern for China. Yet, without enough diplomatic strength, even great trade prospects aren’t always a guarantee against disadvantageous actions by other countries. China’s input into the future of the Arctic Silk road will deliver the power that the country needs in multiple ways, which is why they are focused on the project.

L'articolo Arctic Silk Road: Expansion Of China’s Diplomatic Power? proviene da InsideOver.

Nations are eyeing the Arctic, formerly an undeveloped area protected by thick layers of ice, snow and bitter temperatures, now that climate change is nipping away at nature’s obstacles.

It has spawned what amounts to a new cold war as countries race to plunder a treasure trove of oil and minerals. Environmentalists fear it will destroy the fragile Arctic ecosystem. Because they take a long time to grow and/or reproduce, any activity that disrupts plant, bird, animal and fish life is damaging.

Since the Arctic is warming faster than anywhere on Earth, it is considered an emerging frontier and the pioneer prize is territory rich in fish, oil, gas and minerals.

To see how climate change and rich deposits make the Arctic such an attractive proposition, one need look no further than Canada’s Baffin Island.

The fifth-largest island in the world sits on iron ore, arguably the world’s richest and most abundant source.

On the island is the Mary River mine with enough iron ore to last for generations. It is already being mined and production will increase as infrastructure grows – a material handling system, a crusher and railcars for unloading.

But there are more opportunities than just mineral deposits. The famed Northwest Passage, where ice is melting, will move from history pages to finally become reality as one of the prime shipping routes. It will also be a tourist destination as travellers flock to the Arctic to gaze upon majestic scenery populated with narwhal, walrus, seals, ox, and the Arctic white fox that lives farther north than any other land animal.

There’s fish like the delicious Arctic Char for the anglers. Hunters and naturalists will be drawn by the vast array of animals, including polar bears, reindeer and moose.

So at least eight nations have queued up for battleground Arctic: Canada, Denmark (includes Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States. All are members of the Arctic Council. The council is supposed to foster co-operation, co-ordination and interaction among members, but that is the ideal, not reality. So rich is the prize that even China has elbowed into the fray, calling itself a near-Arctic state that wants to create a ‘Polar Silk Road.’

And Russia upped the ante in this high-stakes game by putting its first floating nuclear power plant in operation Dec. 19, 2019. Built at a cost of $US232 million and 10 years in construction, the Akademik Lomonosov sits off the tundra along the Arctic coast to northeastern Siberia.

Environmentalists warn it is a potential “nuclear Titanic” with fuel stored onboard and a leak could seriously impact the fragile Arctic.

The United States, which experts suggest has lagged in Arctic development, is now primed to go.

The subject of climate change has had no place in the official political American vocabulary since Donald Trump became president. But that does not mean Americans want to mine the Arctic for its riches.

Trump has tried to reverse Barack Obama’s policy to allow oil drilling in the Arctic but so far has been stymied by the courts and fierce opposition.

Still, after decades of basically who cares, the aggressive interest and oil and gas investments in the Arctic by America’s traditional rivals – Russia and China – has caught the attention of the White House.

In May, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo signalled the new interest speaking at an Arctic Council meeting.

“This is America’s moment to stand up as an Arctic nation and for the Arctic’s future,” he said. “Because far from the barren backcountry that many thought it to be…the Arctic is at the forefront of opportunity and abundance.”

Many, such as scientists and native peoples, fear ice melts and the rapid changes in the Arctic. But for Pompeo, the glass is half full.

The reduction in ice makes it possible for cargo ships to use the Northwest Passage and he said the sea lanes could become the “21^st Century Suez and Panama Canals.”

Speaking about Russia and China, Pompeo warned both against provocative actions such as military buildup.

“Do we want the Arctic Ocean to transform into a new South China Sea, fraught with militarization and competing territorial claims?” he asked. “Do we want the fragile Arctic environment exposed to the same ecological devastation caused by China’s fishing fleet in the seas off its coast, or unregulated industrial activity in its own country? I think the answers are pretty clear.”

The race for the Arctic heated up in August 2007 when two Russian submersibles dove to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean and planted a flag at the North Pole. Then Canadian foreign affairs minister Peter Mackay thought the stunt silly.

“This isn’t the 15^th Century,” he said. “You can’t go around the world and just plant flags and say, ‘We’re claiming this territory.’”

But it could also be considered as the first symbolic shot in the cold war for the Arctic. And it is likely the environment will play second fiddle to the economic boom.

L'articolo New Cold War Looms As Arctic Heats Up proviene da InsideOver.